If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please do not post jobs in this forum. The appropriate place to do so is in the Job Board forum

You asked. I started the thread about why people give money to their competition.

It was not me that asked. Whether ECP's support the optical giants or not, we live in a democratic society where people are entitled to make their own purchasing decisions based on whatever rationale they feel appropriate from whomever they choose.

Politely and carefully bashing such a giant and then spinning it to be in your favour is very weak and sheepish.

It was not me that asked. Whether ECP's support the optical giants or not, we live in a democratic society where people are entitled to make their own purchasing decisions based on whatever rationale they feel appropriate from whomever they choose.

Politely and carefully bashing such a giant and then spinning it to be in your favour is very weak and sheepish.

In a democratic society we are able to ask questions and freely express our views without being scolded. I agree that supporting Essilor and Lux are poor business decisions for ECPs.

E wants to brand every little thing - the coating, the material, the design, the transition etc... adding "a la carte" fees and jacking up prices 3% every year. On CC website, they are happy to offer bundles, unbranded, which dont rise in price 3% every year (or so it seems).

So E wants ECPS to absorb the inflation costs, pay top dollar, maintain the expensive brands, while they happily provide the volume/discount to end consumers. Basically we subsidize their capturing the whole pie while their stock price soars and our margins and strength diminish. It is POISON to this profession and supporting them does not make sense. In fact it is a lazy approach. Finding and supporting unbranded/white label suppliers takes a bit of work, affords much better pricing and is like switching from an unhealthy fast food diet to a more organic whole grain one!!!

E wants to brand every little thing - the coating, the material, the design, the transition etc... adding "a la carte" fees and jacking up prices 3% every year. On CC website, they are happy to offer bundles, unbranded, which dont rise in price 3% every year (or so it seems).

So E wants ECPS to absorb the inflation costs, pay top dollar, maintain the expensive brands, while they happily provide the volume/discount to end consumers. Basically we subsidize their capturing the whole pie while their stock price soars and our margins and strength diminish. It is POISON to this profession and supporting them does not make sense. In fact it is a lazy approach. Finding and supporting unbranded/white label suppliers takes a bit of work, affords much better pricing and is like switching from an unhealthy fast food diet to a more organic whole grain one!!!

Whether or not one agrees with their size or approach in the marketplace, it has proven itself many times over to be very successful. If you had that kind of swagger and control, who wouldn't want more control on all aspects of your own brands portfolio and business units?

Perfectly stated!!
And people don't realize that Essilor controls Nikon as well. One other fact, over half of Nikon 's work is done offshore and a fair percentage of Essilor's work too. That is taking away jobs and tax dollars from Canada.

Perfectly stated!!
And people don't realize that Essilor controls Nikon as well. One other fact, over half of Nikon 's work is done offshore and a fair percentage of Essilor's work too. That is taking away jobs and tax dollars from Canada.

It's called global sourcing and is nothing new, just more prevalent nowadays. Every single lens supplier in Canada big or small is connected to that model like it or not. They must be linked to be able to survive. We all want the best brands, best quality and best prices...but then we complain about lost jobs and tax dollars? We don't have to look past our bathroom mirrors to see why this is necessary.

The rights to Seiko is basically owned by Hoya which also gets funneled back to Japan, whether it was purchased and processed in Toronto or across the Pacific. So, the big lens companies are all a little guilty - big deal.

perhaps negotiating with committed full volume would bring you better wholesale prices. pp is a good lab with advertised name brand product that is recognized by the public.

But ECP's never throw their eggs into one basket with any suppliers. And even when suppliers drop their drawers for a period of time to hopefully gain more of a particular ECP's monthly spend, it seldom works. The ECP's still want to spread and share the volume while the supplier simply cannibalizes what ever margin is left. It's a very risky move with no incremental growth.

Whether or not one agrees with their size or approach in the marketplace, it has proven itself many times over to be very successful. If you had that kind of swagger and control, who wouldn't want more control on all aspects of your own brands portfolio and business units?

My point is that what is good for E is NOT good for ECPs. While we subsidize their massive growth our own position diminishes. Sure if I were the CEO of E I would see it their way, but I am not a shareholder or employee of E, I am an independent ecp.

Just as in other health professions (dentist? doctor?), the professional is the brand. Do you know the brand of filling your dentist uses?

By building your own brand and NOT emphasizing the name of the LENS or LENS COATING you use (does Warby? does CC?) you strengthen your position, imho. Be the brand.

My point is that what is good for E is NOT good for ECPs. While we subsidize their massive growth our own position diminishes. Sure if I were the CEO of E I would see it their way, but I am not a shareholder or employee of E, I am an independent ecp.

Just as in other health professions (dentist? doctor?), the professional is the brand. Do you know the brand of filling your dentist uses?

By building your own brand and NOT emphasizing the name of the LENS or LENS COATING you use (does Warby? does CC?) you strengthen your position, imho. Be the brand.

Dentists are successful because they have no competition, other than themselves. Comparing them to ECPs is apples and oranges. There are no online tooth filling sites that I know of as yet. Wholesale pricing differences from different labs are not that great and as an independent I am happy to absorb that difference and use independent labs. Why would any ECP want a multi-tiered giant like E or Lux to know your business volumes? Like Imperial from the past, when a giant knows your business, they can use that knowledge for their own personal gains.

Dentists are successful because they have no competition, other than themselves. Comparing them to ECPs is apples and oranges. There are no online tooth filling sites that I know of as yet. Wholesale pricing differences from different labs are not that great and as an independent I am happy to absorb that difference and use independent labs. Why would any ECP want a multi-tiered giant like E or Lux to know your business volumes? Like Imperial from the past, when a giant knows your business, they can use that knowledge for their own personal gains.

1) i am moving almost completely away from selling branded lenses. it is bad enough with contacts and certain frame brands - but at least on the ophthalmic lenses I do not need the multinational's products.
2) i agree that another reason to avoid these products is for the reason you state= so they don't know my volumes etc..
3) wholesale pricing differences- if you source globally, you can get some very attractive prices on all sorts of rx lenses...quite a bit less (depending on material, lens type etc..) than locally, in many cases.

this has been working really well for us and I wish others would do the same as this is what is best for independent ECPs to flourish.

the greatest trajedy of Essilor is how poor their progressive really are. They are just now adding features to their lenses that Rodenstock had in 2002, and Zeiss, Shamir and Seiko all had by 2004. Sadly most of their technical effort has been to get around the Zeiss and Seiko patents on Free-form. Essilor still does not make a fully compensated spherical free-form with advance ray-tracing. They just added frame adjustments into 1 design. Yea!

I sadly see a huge rush by Essilor when the Ziess patent expires in 2019 to full embrace free-form, but spin it in way the entire idea is their invention.

Sadly millions of Essilor customers are wearing way over priced, pathetically under optimized progressives and don't even know it, all because Essilor doesn't want to pay a $2.60 patent fee per pair, yet still charges exorbitant prices for very old technology.

Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy ~Benjamin Franklin

the greatest trajedy of Essilor is how poor their progressive really are. They are just now adding features to their lenses that Rodenstock had in 2002, and Zeiss, Shamir and Seiko all had by 2004. Sadly most of their technical effort has been to get around the Zeiss and Seiko patents on Free-form. Essilor still does not make a fully compensated spherical free-form with advance ray-tracing. They just added frame adjustments into 1 design. Yea!

I sadly see a huge rush by Essilor when the Ziess patent expires in 2019 to full embrace free-form, but spin it in way the entire idea is their invention.

Sadly millions of Essilor customers are wearing way over priced, pathetically under optimized progressives and don't even know it, all because Essilor doesn't want to pay a $2.60 patent fee per pair, yet still charges exorbitant prices for very old technology.

That is sadly very true; there is no reason to use any Essilor progressive if you have a choice. They do have a decent coating process but the price paid is crazy vs what you get.

Essilor is today the most aggressive optical corporation. Already 50 years ago they would not take one step without calculating to the point if they could take the step and at what risk. They only employ top rated people in important positions.

Their advertising department is a scientific operation where every impact is studied and calculated before going public.

They have realized that if they can sell directly to the public they can multiply their profits, which is better than act just as a distributor and wholesaler to the optical retail trade. So far they have proven this point by now having over 14 on-line websites in the optical retail business.

The public is now asking to get Essilor products due to its public advertising and your colleagues find it easier to just supply it, than to convince customers of something similar made by somebody else.

What retailers do not realize is that on-line glasses are not a finished,
checked and adjusted product. More than often the optometrist or optician is asked to do that job for the the consumer at little or no charge.

Opticians and Optometrists will have to change their retailing habits from their gross profit included in their selling price to a competitive one and charge separately for the services they provide.

That is sadly very true; there is no reason to use any Essilor progressive if you have a choice. They do have a decent coating process but the price paid is crazy vs what you get.

IMO Crizal is a terrible AR coating. Look at the coating with a fluorescent lights behind... after 2 years of wear 80 to 90% of the times you see this generalized "glazing" on the lenses. We have been using Hoya EX3 for over 2 years now... nothing like this occurs with the EX3. What I find sad with Hoya USA/ Canada though is the fact they do not have half of the innovative products Hoya Japan offers... If they would ever bring all these products in North America, I'm sure Essilor would begin to get very nervous! I've tried to get an answer from Hoya why the selection of products offered here is so limited compared to Japan... nobody could (or perhaps nobody wants) give me a clear answer! I even suggested to them to outsource some lenses and get them done in Hoya's factories in Asia/Japan... I was told shipping would be too expensive... BS obviously as Nikon, Essilor and Shamir do it on a large scale...